I am obviously not Bill Nye. However, as someone that grew up with him I do believe that he is influencing young minds in a positive way. He is teaching them to be curious, to seek knowledge whenever possible and to be respectful to others. Whether it is in a scientific field or exploring their own faith children and adults should always be curious and want to learn more. That is what Bill Nye Stands for.
I know it is a frightening thought, but as an agnostic myself. I do not believe that there needs to be a meaning of life. I struggle with this on occasion because if there is no overwhelming purpose to existence life can feel insignificant.
This is actually the question that inspired me to respond to all of these. The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of a closed system never decreases as everything moves toward a state of maximum entropy.
Now this basically means that everything all the time is getting more and more chaotic. Though to be honest it has more to do with heat than biology. In fact this law really has very little to do with biology. However, when we apply it to biology and DNA replication the increase in entropy means that the replication will not be perfect due in part to the difference in energy for mismatch bonds. If the entropy decreased we would see a trend toward more homogenized species, which we clearly do not. As more mutations occur this actually encourages adaption and evolution within species.
EDIT: I have been informed by numerous commentors and messages that the second law can not be applied to life due to it not being a closed system. I never claimed to be a physicist and I recognize this. However, my response here is meant to reflect applying it to the system and showing that it does not refute anything.
All biological mechanisms move toward the state of higher entropy and a small number of mutations are caused directly by the energy difference of mismatched bonds. While I admit that applying the second law to life is not accurate if we do so as a model, we see that it still does encourage mutation.
I don't believe that responding with "It simply doesn't apply" to this bearded gentlemen would have been in the spirit of this post.
This is a really good question. The short answer is yes, by chance. The long answer is that we do not know exactly when the first single cell organisms appeared, we know that they have existed for at least 3 billion years. As far as it happening on it's own, you have to remember that the climate on Earth was very different than it is today. It was significantly warmer and there was little to no oxygen in the atmosphere.
This experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment took place in 1953. Miller and Urey mimicked a pre-historic Earth environment and showed naturally forming amino acids, precursors to proteins.
Another more recent study created a self replicating RNA strand. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16382-artificial-molecule-evolves-in-the-lab.html
EDIT: The Miller-Urey experiment is more of a proof of concept than a literal explanation of how proteins formed billions of years ago. It has come under criticism for not accurately replicating ancient Earth conditions.
I am assuming that this is referring to the so-called "missing link" in human evolution. Where Lucy would be the nearly complete Australopithecus skeleton. This Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils#Human_evolution actually shows just a few of the evolutionary steps between our common ape-like ancestors and modern humans. One thing that should be noted is that modern apes are not the creatures we evolved from. Evolution doesn't hold still, while we did evolve from apes, the ones that exist today evolved along side us on a different evolutionary path.
Edit: A lot of people are mad that I said we evolved from apes. I honestly don't see the problem since the term apes can refer to really any of the hominidae species, not just modern day great apes. However, for clarity I've changed my wording above.
This is a tough one to stay respectful on. Essentially yes. It is illogical. Which isn't to say that you absolutely must be incorrect. Logic needs to be based on a clear path of reasoning. However, an all-powerful creator god would not be constrained to a logical universe. So if God did create the world whole, he did so in a way that defies reason. Which is essentially what would make him God. I should point out however that according to the Bible even God took a few days to create the world.
While I understand where you're coming from with this, we actually do have evidence of the Big Bang. Namely, the universe is still spreading outward. http://www.universetoday.com/106498/what-is-the-evidence-for-the-big-bang/ this website has some pretty good info on this. I'm not a physicist so this is not my strong suit.
This is actually grouping a lot of people together under a belief that is not very widely believed. There is some evidence that the first sparks of life on earth may have fallen in a meteor shower about 3.8 billion years ago but I personally do not believe in any intelligent design due to extraterrestrial interference. I also want to point out that some theists believe that there is a god but he set evolution in place rather than a literal Garden of Eden.
The short answer is no, I am not. I'm striving to remain respectful but I find this question deeply offensive. The problem I have with this line of thinking is that you want me to be afraid of God. Who is supposed to love us unconditionally but will punish me if I don't worship. If God exists and he is benevolent then he will love me no matter who or what I am and the idea that he will spank me if I don't worship him in a specific way is harmful to society. We should not be afraid to be who or what we are because if there is a creator he created us in his image. That's all I'm going to say on this.
I'm not an astrophysicist, however my limited knowledge on the Big Bang does not involve an exploding star. I honestly have no idea what existed before the Big Bang. I would love to talk to a physicist about this. I feel like this is where a creator god and science get the closest together. If a god sparked the Big Bang it could reconcile the two. Again this is not my field, I apologize for not knowing more about it.
Read more: http://imgur.com/gallery/EgdN1